New Urban Agendahttp://www.newurbanagenda.com
The Greater Toronto and Hamilton AreaWed, 14 Feb 2018 21:31:55 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.3Germans debate free public transithttp://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=562
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=562#respondWed, 14 Feb 2018 21:31:55 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=562
The Europeans, unlike North Americans, are serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In Germany there is talk of making all public transit free. The problem is not finding the resources to finance the move, it is to get enough trains, … Continue reading →]]>The Europeans, unlike North Americans, are serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In Germany there is talk of making all public transit free. The problem is not finding the resources to finance the move, it is to get enough trains, buses, LRT, and other forms of public transit vehicles to meet the demand. When are we going to have a serious discussion about transit?

]]>http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?feed=rss2&p=5620Support the Island Bird Sanctuaryhttp://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=557
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=557#respondFri, 26 Jan 2018 15:42:03 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=557
The Toronto Field Naturalists are leading the effort to create a bird sanctuary on Toronto Island. This is one of the most important flyways for migratory birds on the Great Lakes. The City of Toronto Executive Committee has endorsed the … Continue reading →]]>The Toronto Field Naturalists are leading the effort to create a bird sanctuary on Toronto Island. This is one of the most important flyways for migratory birds on the Great Lakes.

The City of Toronto Executive Committee has endorsed the bird sanctuary, which is the first step in the approvals process. The motion will go to the City Council on January 31.

The Field Naturalists are urging people to sign their petition in support of the effort. Councillor Joe Cressy will take the petition, and the names of those who have signed it, to council on the day of the debate.

I urge you to sign the petition and forward it to your friends who you think will support this effort. This is the link.

]]>http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?feed=rss2&p=5570Airports and development don’t mixhttp://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=553
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=553#commentsMon, 22 Jan 2018 20:42:29 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=553
Last week Hamilton’s City Council approved a development virtually across the road from the Mount Hope Airport (John C. Munro, Hamilton International Airport). Altogether the approval of the Hotz and Son Development will allow the building of 271 single family … Continue reading →]]>Last week Hamilton’s City Council approved a development virtually across the road from the Mount Hope Airport (John C. Munro, Hamilton International Airport). Altogether the approval of the Hotz and Son Development will allow the building of 271 single family houses and 440 townhouses.

Problems abound with this development. Because the project has been on the books for several years it falls under planning rules that were replaced at least five years ago. Even the ward councillor who moved acceptance of the project, Brenda Johnson, admitted that it probably would not be approved today because it is exempted from rules protecting ecologically significant areas and rules around airport noise.

Across Ontario residents are complaining of noise, pollution, and increased traffic caused by airports. That is particularly true of the communities around Pearson International, and residents close to Billy Bishop, on Toronto’s Waterfront, have pointed to many different problems.

Hamilton council has ignored all of this. The property that will be developed is across the road from the Warplane Heritage Museum, a recently built air cargo facility, and is kitty corner from the airport itself. The airport has advised that they are opposed to the development.

The development plan also does not take into account that there are plans to extend the north-south runway of the airport, and the city has spent $10 million to acquire land for the extension. If the extension is built it will greatly increase the noise from the airport.

The problem is not just the airport. It is a Hamilton City Council whose members are in favour of development of almost any kind. Regulations around airport noise have been put in place to protect the public. Here is a flagrant use of legal loopholes to approve a development and by-pass regulations. It is inviting trouble.

With the help of Hamilton CATCH. http://hamiltoncatch.org/view_article.php?id=1527

]]>http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?feed=rss2&p=5531Transforming North York’s Yonge Streethttp://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=550
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=550#respondFri, 19 Jan 2018 02:52:34 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=550
It is distressing. Councillor John Filion, and North York citizens, are supporting a proposal from city staff to change Yonge Street, from Sheppard north to Finch, into a walkable neighborhood, and who is opposed? Mayor John Tory. It is not … Continue reading →]]>It is distressing. Councillor John Filion, and North York citizens, are supporting a proposal from city staff to change Yonge Street, from Sheppard north to Finch, into a walkable neighborhood, and who is opposed? Mayor John Tory.

Times Square was transformed into a people’s place

It is not that this is a radical plan. It proposes to reconfigure Yonge Street in North York from six lanes, three in each direction, to four lanes, two in each direction. The sidewalks would be widened to make the street more walkable and various street furniture and amenities would be added to create a more pleasant environment.

This is how John Filion sees it. The people, “deserve a main street with some atmosphere and some culture. They deserve sidewalks wide enough to sit down for a glass of wine and lunch with a friend.”

Cities across North America, are discovering the benefits of taming traffic and promoting walking communities. Andrew Picard says, “Walking is the closest thing we have to a wonder drug. It’s good for your heart, your mind and your bones.” (Globe and Mail, September 26, 2017)

It also strengthens communities and promotes commerce. It reduces crime, leads to more varied and integrated communities, and creates a better balance between commercial and residential interests. It is vibrant communities like this where people of all ages want to live and work. These are the neighborhoods that will develop and grow stronger in the future.

To quote Picard again: “If you want healthy communities, you need to create a sense of space, of belonging; you need to build inclusive, diverse spaces, where healthy runners and cyclists, parents pushing strollers, frail seniors with walkers, people using wheelchairs, street people, immigrant shop owners and pin-striped business types all feel at ease moving about and intermingling. Streets are the original and ultimate social network; you need to construct them not only for commerce, but for culture and community-building.”

As I say in my book, The New Urban Agenda, we are beginning to reinvent our cities, and it is demands to take back the public spaces – the streets, the sidewalks, the parks and all public amenities – that is the essential first step in this transformation.

In other cities politicians are leading these efforts to transform cities, but in Toronto, John Tory and Councillors like him, are still insisting the automobile has priority over the pedestrian. It is time we had politicians who want to promote livable cities and inclusive neighborhoods.

]]>http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?feed=rss2&p=5500Building a Progressive Political Movement at City Hallhttp://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=547
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=547#respondMon, 08 Jan 2018 15:16:38 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=547
Luke Savage, a writer of the Broadbent Institute, published a piece in the Globe and Mail this morning titled “Biting cold exposes rot in city’s attitudes to poverty.” (January 8, 2018) He describes an internal debate in Toronto’s civic administration … Continue reading →]]>Luke Savage, a writer of the Broadbent Institute, published a piece in the Globe and Mail this morning titled “Biting cold exposes rot in city’s attitudes to poverty.” (January 8, 2018) He describes an internal debate in Toronto’s civic administration and then goes on to comment.

Expensive housing proliferates while the needs of middle and low income people are ignored

“This apparent conflict over data has ultimately exposed a much deeper rot, not only in Toronto’s overall attitude towards poverty and homelessness, but in the character of the political consensus that governs it – one that has elevated the market above all else and substituted real human needs for cold economic calculus. Indeed, the city has increasingly become a place of public decay amid private affluence; one where underfunded infrastructure and social services are allowed to co-exist with scorching condo booms and lucrative financial speculation; where an expensive rental market quite literally drives people onto the streets; where, amidst unfathomable wealth, some citizens are forced to suffer in the cold while officials prevaricate about the availability of shelter beds in overcrowded facilities.”

This is a powerful condemnation and Savage points directly at John Tory, Toronto City Council, and other politicians for, “a penny-pinching ethos … that has meant cutting costs and reducing the quality of public services while slashing taxes and public spending.”

This is a good summary of John Tory’s politics and the administration that he leads at city hall. In fact, this approach is typical of almost every municipality in Ontario – keep costs as low as possible, hold the line on property taxes, provide approvals for private developers to build condos and expensive rental accommodation, ignore demands for affordable housing and the crisis of poverty. This is the agenda of the majority of our municipal politicians at a time of unprecedented wealth, and the growing crisis of the poor, young people, and the middle class.

The question, then, is what are we going to do about it? This is an election year and politicians are already working the back rooms to raise the funds and the supporters to get re-elected. This we know. There will never be a change in Toronto politics until a majority of progressives are elected to city council.

There are many reasons why change is difficult: the lack of political party system, the power of incumbency, the low levels of political participation in the grass roots, particularly in the suburbs, and the lack of information at a community level that can hold politicians to account.

It is time to build a progressive political movement in Toronto, Hamilton and across the GTA.

]]>http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?feed=rss2&p=5470Cities and Commuteshttp://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=544
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=544#respondFri, 01 Dec 2017 16:50:08 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=544
Oliver Moore published an interesting summary of the use of cycling and public transit in the November 30th edition of the Globe and Mail. He gleaned the information from a recent Statistics Canada report. In 2016, he reports, 74.0% of … Continue reading →]]>Oliver Moore published an interesting summary of the use of cycling and public transit in the November 30th edition of the Globe and Mail. He gleaned the information from a recent Statistics Canada report.

In 2016, he reports, 74.0% of workers in Canada commute to work by car, truck or van as the driver, 12.4% on public transit, 6.9% walking or riding a bicycle, 5.5% as a passenger of a car and 1.1% by other means. Almost 80% of all Canadians commute in private vehicles.

Bike riders on the Martin Goodman Trail in Toronto

In large cities “active” commuting is on the rise. In Toronto 6.7% commuted to work by cycling or walking, in Montreal the figure is 7.2%, and in Vancouver 9.1%. In the B.C. City of Victoria, the number is 16.9%, the highest in the country.

Moore points out that in the last 20 years “the number of people using bicycles as their main method of commuting nearly doubled, rising 87.9%.” At the same time “the number of people using public transit increased 31.5%.”

Large cities are seeing the most changes. Across the country almost 80% of workers commute by private vehicle, but in the three largest cities, it drops to less than 70%. In Toronto almost one in four commuters use transit, the highest in the country. Vancouver has seen a doubling of transit users in the last 15 years, since the SkyTrain rail network opened.

Despite the rise in the use of transit and cycling, gridlock of the streets continues to get worse in the large cities. In Toronto, the average one-way commuting duration in 2016 was 34 minutes, Montreal 30.0 minutes, and Vancouver 29.7 minutes. Not surprisingly, the general rule across the country is that, the larger the city, the longer the commute.

The question remains, how are we going to build more livable cities, if commuters continue to use private vehicles to get to work or school? There are a variety of answers.

Stop urban sprawl and increase the density of existing built up communities.

Encourage cycling across the urban areas by building dedicated, safe bike lanes.

Make the pedestrian experience safer by widening sidewalks and improving crosswalks. At the same time improve and beautify the public domain by making walking on city streets more enjoyable.

Discourage the use of cars in the congested districts of our cities by narrowing streets, creating pedestrian only streets, and other traffic calming improvements.

Climate change is another very important issue when it comes to our use of cars and trucks. We will never reduce our greenhouse gas emissions until electric vehicles become the norm.

]]>http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?feed=rss2&p=5440Housing crisis for middle-income familieshttp://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=539
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=539#respondThu, 30 Nov 2017 14:26:13 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=539
This is an item extracted from the “City Building Bulletin” of Ryerson University. It describes one of the reasons why we have a serious housing problem for middle income families. Bill Freeman A new report called Bedrooms in the Sky: Is … Continue reading →]]>

This is an item extracted from the “City Building Bulletin” of Ryerson University. It describes one of the reasons why we have a serious housing problem for middle income families. Bill Freeman

“We are building an all-time high of condos, but not enough missing middle housing that’s suitable for a range of family sizes and income levels,” says Cherise Burda, Executive Director of CBI and a report co-author. “Although we’re building tall, we’re still building small units like studios and one-bedrooms. This will have serious consequences for future residents.”

The report finds that 94,000 condo apartments will be completed in the GTA over the next five years—the highest number on record—and most will be in buildings over 20 storeys. At the same time, only 38 per cent of condo apartments in development in the City of Toronto are two bedrooms and larger. The researchers suggest this will make it especially difficult in the coming years to accommodate “up-sizing” young families and downsizing senior citizens leaving their single-detached homes.

]]>http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?feed=rss2&p=5390Montreal and Toronto: the politics of change over status quohttp://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=534
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=534#respondMon, 06 Nov 2017 15:48:23 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=534
Contrast the Montreal civic election, held yesterday, November 5th, with the last Toronto election held in November 2014, and you will understand why party politics is the only answer to the dysfunction with municipal politics in Ontario. Yesterday Valerie Plante … Continue reading →]]>Contrast the Montreal civic election, held yesterday, November 5th, with the last Toronto election held in November 2014, and you will understand why party politics is the only answer to the dysfunction with municipal politics in Ontario.

Valarie Plante, the new mayor of Montreal

Yesterday Valerie Plante became the first woman mayor in Montreal’s 375 year history. Not only that, her party, Project Montreal, took the majority of seats on council. Plante and her party ran on a platform of change. She advocated an expansion of the subway system, and a large investment in social housing, among other issues.

Denis Coderre, the incumbent mayor, took the election for granted. He appeared arrogant, ignored the mistakes of his administration, and brushed off the attacks from the opposition until the very last days of the campaign.

What is remarkable about the Montreal election, from the point of view of a Torontonian, is how the party system in Montreal facilitated fundamental change. Coderre, and his status quo political party named after himself, was decisively swept from power. The Montreal electorate wanted change and the election delivered it. That is a sign of a vital democracy.

That simply could not, and will not, happen in Toronto, and the reason is there are no political parties in this city. Every municipal candidate runs as an individual. They are ward healers in the worst sense and incumbents win over and over again.

I have written about this in my book, The New Urban Agenda, and more recently in an article called, “Toronto Politics and the Possibility for Change,” published in a book called The Rise of Cities, edited by Dimitrios Roussopoulos. Let me repeat some of the arguments I made because they are very relevant for those of us concerned about our city.

Since Toronto was incorporated in 1834 there have been 72 mayors. 45.8% of the mayors have been lawyers or other professionals, 43.2% were from business, the rest journalists and one a union organizer. On the present council only 31.8% are women. Despite the fact that today over 50% of Torontonians are visible minorities, only five, or 11.4%, are come from visible minority groups. Toronto council is not a good representation of the social characteristics of the city’s population.

But the most striking factor in who gets elected municipally in Ontario, Toronto included, is incumbency. In the 2014 Toronto election only one incumbent councillor was defeated out of the 44 members. Once a politician is elected it is very rare that they are defeated. Incumbent politicians have so much advantage over other candidates, that they have to do something very drastic to be defeated.

As a result, Toronto city council has become static, even ossified. Councillors tend to be old, white, male, and their votes on issues reflect their conservative political views. This does not signal a healthy democracy. Council is adverse to taking risks, or promoting new ideas. They vote in favour of development, and support cars over cycling. They are very reluctant to increase property taxes. They claim to support subways and transit, but only if another level government will pay for it. They admit that poverty, and affordable housing is a crisis, but they will not spend money to solve or ameliorate the problems.

Contrast Toronto politics to the dynamic change that happened yesterday in Montreal, and it is obvious that political parties at a municipal level make a difference. A political party, and the policies that they promote, give an identity to a group of politicians running for office. Voters are able to make a real choice based on their perception of the leaders and their policies.

In Toronto we have none of that, and so we have a politics that is uninspiring and unable to face change. It is a dysfunctional politics that will never provide the leadership we need.

(Thanks to Andre Picard, of the Globe and Mail, for his coverage of the Montreal election.)

]]>http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?feed=rss2&p=5340http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=532
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=532#respondFri, 03 Nov 2017 15:03:40 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=532
Democracy, Neoliberalism, and Participation In my latest book, Democracy Rising: Politics and Participation in Canada, I argue that our representative democratic form of government is failing us. Elites, particularly wealthy corporate elites, have captured the political system to promote their … Continue reading →]]>Democracy, Neoliberalism, and Participation

In my latest book, Democracy Rising: Politics and Participation in Canada, I argue that our representative democratic form of government is failing us. Elites, particularly wealthy corporate elites, have captured the political system to promote their own interests.

Not only does government favour corporate development and profits, in the belief that this will increase the country’s wealth and employment, but we have a tax system that benefits the wealthy. The off-shoring of wealth to avoid taxation has become a serious problem. An economic and political system has been developed that benefits the 1%, while the rest of us languish.

All of this inequality, and concentration of wealth in the hands of the few, is justified by the ideology of neoliberalism. This is a self-serving theory that promotes rapacious capitalism, inequality, low pay for workers, poor working conditions, and attacks the welfare state as unnecessary and unaffordable. Neoliberalism goes so far as to argue that competition is the natural state of the human condition. It is good for the country and economy because it leads to efficiencies and innovation.

It is a theory that has been adopted by the corporate and political elite in virtually all of the developed countries. Today Donald Trump is the leading advocate, but Canada suffered from the ideology for almost ten years with the Stephen Harper government. Justin Trudeau is leading a government that is pushing back neoliberalism, but the conservative assault on minor tax reform measures shows just how ingrained this ideology has become.

To challenge this ideology in Canada, we have to begin by developing a different ideology, one that stresses co-operation and participation. Competition is not the natural state of the human condition. It was co-operation that led to the development of our civilizations, and working together in a co-operative way is the way we interact at work, politics, public institutions, and private corporations. Humans have a remarkable ability to work together to achieve collective goals.

We have to challenge the neoliberal ideology of selfishness and greed by promoting a participatory culture. I see it emerging everywhere I go: environmental groups, trade unions, co-ops, community groups, clubs, and sporting associations. Democratic organizations are everywhere in our society. They are run democratically, and they provide the way that people can participate. (Last weekend I attended a public meeting about Toronto’s Waterfront called “Waterfront for All.” Well over 300 people were there to talk about the new neighbourhood that is emerging in the city. It was inspiring to see how citizens want to participate in the task of rebuilding our city.)

We need to reform our parliaments and create a workable system of proportional representation, but above all we have to challenge neoliberalism and advocate that we need co-operation, engagement, and participation in all aspects of our lives. That is the only way that we will develop a caring, egalitarian society where everyone has the chance to develop to their own potential.

]]>http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?feed=rss2&p=5320The UN vote on nuclear disarmamenthttp://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=529
http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=529#respondWed, 16 Aug 2017 22:02:36 +0000http://www.newurbanagenda.com/?p=529
I made a small error in the last posting. Technically, Canada didn’t ‘vote against’ the new treaty. They just refused to participate in the vote – one country abstained (Singapore) and one voted against (Netherlands) and 122 voted in favour. … Continue reading →]]>I made a small error in the last posting. Technically, Canada didn’t ‘vote against’ the new treaty. They just refused to participate in the vote – one country abstained (Singapore) and one voted against (Netherlands) and 122 voted in favour. The rest refused to show up.